To the head of the Article:
Author: Chapati Meghana 3 ydc LLB 2nd year Sri Padmavathi mahila Vishwa vidhayalayam.
To The point :
To the point of about this topic on December 13 th 2023 . In parliament 2 pesons are entered they are sagar sharma and Manorajan they had entered on Lok sabha chamber from the public gallery and then a has to be jumped through a Table of parliament members sitting .he has be opened a yellow colour box released a smoke canister . other persons named Amol Shinde and Neelam Devi chanted slogans. This caused chaos and panic within the House, leading to the immediate adjournment of the session. Outside the building, two other individuals named Vishal Sharma and Lalit Jha were arrested for doing similar activities.During this incident around hundred leaders including Rahul Gandhi and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh were present in the House.
Use of legal jargon:
- Actus reus:The guilty act or criminal behavior, in this case, the breach of security and disruption of Parliament proceedings.
- Mens rea: The guilty mind or criminal intent, which may be relevant in determining the motivations and culpability of the accused.
3,Culpable homicide: A charge that may be applicable if the accused’s actions resulted in harm or injury to others.
4 ,conspiracy: A charge that may be applicable if the accused collaborated with others to plan and execute the breach.
5 ,Trespass: A charge that may be applicable if the accused unlawfully entered the Parliament premises.
6 ,Public nuisance: A charge that may be applicable if the accused’s actions caused harm or disturbance to the public.
7,Section 144: A provision of the Indian Penal Code that prohibits unlawful assembly and rioting.
8, Section 307: A provision of the Indian Penal Code that deals with attempt to murder.
9, Section 120B: A provision of the Indian Penal Code that deals with criminal conspiracy
The proofs :
Security Footage:The incident was captured on security cameras, showing the intruders releasing a yellow-colored smoke canister and chanting slogans .
Eyewitness Accounts: Members of Parliament, including Hanuman Beniwal, who caught and overpowered one of the intruders, prHere are some examples of legal jargon that may be used in the context of the Parliament attack case:
These terms may be used in legal proceedings, judgments, and discussions related to the Parliament attack case.ovided eyewitness accounts of the incident .
Investigation Findings: A preliminary inquiry revealed that the position of Joint Secretary had been vacant for over 45 days, and there was a 40% shortage in security staff .
-Accused’s Confession: The mastermind of the breach, Lalit Jha, admitted during interrogation that he was supposed to hide in Rajasthan after the breach .
– Opposition MPs’ Suspension: The incident led to the suspension of 146 opposition MPs, who were protesting and demanding a statement from the Home Minister Amit Shah .
Abstract:
The 2023 Indian Parliament breach occurred on December 13, 2023, when two intruders, Sagar Sharma and Manoranjan D, entered the Lok Sabha chamber from the public gallery. One of the individuals released a yellow-colored smoke canister, causing chaos and panic, while the other chanted slogans ¹.
The Incident happened around 1 pm, and the House was immediately adjourned. The intruders were
overpowered by MPs, including Hanuman Beniwal, who caught and thrashed one of them. The investigation revealed that the position of Joint Secretary (Security) had been vacant for over 45 days, and there was a 40% shortage in security staff ¹.
The accused were allegedly “brainwashed anti-social elements.” Four individuals were arrested in connection with the breach, and a preliminary inquiry found that the smoke released by the individuals was not harmful and was intended to cause a sensation .
The Incident sparked widespread condemnation and raised serious questions about the security of the Parliament complex. The opposition parties demanded a thorough investigation and questioned the government’s handling of the incident .
Case laws:
Mohammed Afzal Guru vs. State (NCT of Delhi): This case is related to the 2001 Parliament attack. Mohammed Afzal Guru was convicted and sentenced to death for his role in the attack .
S.A.R. Geelani vs. State of Delhi:S.A.R. Geelani, a Delhi University professor, was acquitted of all charges related to the Parliament attack due to lack of evidence .
Shaukat Hussain Guru vs. State Shaukat Hussain Guru, Afzal Guru’s cousin, was convicted and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for his role in the attack .
Conclusion:
In the parliament Attack in 2023 . This incident cause in Delhi. Entered a lok sabha chamber from public gallery they are 2 persons are released smoke canister and chanting slogans .
The breach later led to the suspension of 146 opposition parliament members on claims of causing disorder, 95 from the Lok Sabha, and 46 from the Rajya Sabha. The suspensions were later condemned by Human Rights Watch.
They had include sections . 144 un lawful assembly and roting .124 (B) criminal consipracy . 307 attempt to murder.
FAQ:
- What happened on December 13, 2023?
Two intruders, Sagar Sharma and Manoranjan D, entered the Lok Sabha chamber from the public gallery, releasing a yellow-colored smoke canister and chanting slogans.
2. Where did the incident occur?
The incident occurred in the Lok Sabha chamber of the Indian Parliament in New Delhi.
3. What time did the incident happen?The incident happened around 1 pm.
4,How did the intruders enter the Parliament?
The intruders entered the Parliament from the public gallery.
5,What was the security lapse?
The investigation revealed a 40% shortage in security staff and a vacant position of Joint Secretary (Security) for over 45 days.
